Could the USA qualify to the WC out of Comnebol?

[Bruce S]

Originally posted by loloy_vinotinto

Somthing that most US posters (I refuse to say AMERICAN, cause WE'RE ALL AMERICAN, from Canada to the tip of Argentina) neglect is that in qualification, every team is hungry, is not what you see in a friendly
well, duh. See, we know a lot more about you than you do about us. I know you think the Yanks have no soccer savvy, but you will have to ask our Mexican friends if this is actually still true! I genuinely believe COMEBOL is very tough, no doubt about it. But you think a trip to the jungle in Central America is somehow like Club Med. It is dangerous,the fields are awful, the refs are pretty scared and some of the teams are quite tough.

[Chowderhead]

Yes. No sweat.

[Chowderhead]

Originally posted by condor11
you are telling us we lack respect for concacaf
after telling us that the usa would just stroll trough conmebol qualifiers

Of course we'd stroll. And you and Ecuadorcito would do sweet FA about it.

[condor11]

actually we would probably eliminate u at home just like we did to colombia

its a fact
when we are supposed to lose we usually surprise the cocky teams

and donovan and co would have to watch the world cup at home

[Bruce S]

Originally posted by condor11
actually we would probably eliminate u at home just like we did to colombia

its a fact
when we are supposed to lose we usually surprise the cocky teams

and donovan and co would have to watch the world cup at home
we can laugh it up on here, but the reason the USA has risen so fast in the last few years is that no Arena team is cocky.They are ready to play when they walk out there.It is usually our opponents who are surprised, not Arena's team.
Americans are nauseatingly cocky in many ways but not our footballers. We have had to fight for every single ounce of respect, in the USA and the world.

[Chowderhead]

Originally posted by condor11
actually we would probably eliminate u at home just like we did to colombia

its a fact
when we are supposed to lose we usually surprise the cocky teams

and donovan and co would have to watch the world cup at home

OK, pal.

[speedcake]

thank god Chowderhead finally showed up!! Time for being cocky has come...

We would qualify PERIOD. It is pointless to use the away atmospheres we'd face as an excuse for why we'd lose out. First of all, why not point to the strength of your teams? I'll tell you why, cause they simply aren't as good anymore. You point to crowd trouble, violence, and storming the field as reasons to tremble instead of the skill of your players cause that is all you got!

It's pointless trying to argue that we face very, very similar conditions in central american when we travel there. Some of you just aren't listening. Urine bags are nothing new. D batteries are nothing new. Supporters insulting our guys taking corner kicks is just nothing new. Singing and chanting against us? Nothing new. Having to have armed security? Nothing new. Playing in some of the great sh!tholes of the world to try and get to the world cup? Nothing new. (ok, that last part may have been over the top, but hey, there's no point to this debate so everything goes! hee hee)

Here's a string of results we have gotten in recent years against S. American teams, in all competition:

U.S.A. vs. Bolivia 0-0 Draw 1999 friendly
U.S. vs. Chile 2-1 Win 1999 friendly
U.S. vs. Argentina 1-0 Win 1999 friendly
U.S. vs. Brazil 0-1 Loss 1999 Confed Cup
U.S. vs Chile 2-1 Win 2000 friendly in Chile
U.S. vs. Peru 1-0 Win 2000 Gold Cup
U.S. vs. Columbia 2-2 Draw 2000 Gold Cup
U.S. vs. Columbia 0-1 Loss 2001 friendly
U.S. vs. Brazil 1-2 Loss 2001 friendly
U.S. vs. Equador 0-0 Draw 2001 friendly
U.S. vs. Equador 1-0 Win 2002 friendly
U.S. vs. Uruguay 2-1 Win 2002 WC tuneup
U.S. vs. Argentina 0-1 Loss 2003 friendly
U.S. vs. Venezuela 2-0 Win 2003 friendly

Add to that the very good finish in Copa America back BEFORE our new found successes and there is simply no argument that the U.S. has no chance or little chance of qualifying.

Face the music, the U.S., and Mexico for that matter, both could and would qualify right behind Argentina and Brazil for the WC, leaving behind every single other Brazil wannabe in that region. :)

there, debate over. Or, well, maybe not. heh heh

[sch2383]

Originally posted by speedcake
It's pointless trying to argue that we face very, very similar conditions in central american when we travel there. Some of you just aren't listening. Urine bags are nothing new. D batteries are nothing new. Supporters insulting our guys taking corner kicks is just nothing new. Singing and chanting against us? Nothing new. Having to have armed security? Nothing new. Playing in some of the great sh!tholes of the world to try and get to the world cup? Nothing new. (ok, that last part may have been over the top, but hey, there's no point to this debate so everything goes! hee hee)

And thats just at our home games...

[speedcake]

Originally posted by sch2383
And thats just at our home games...


:D

[Rafael Hernandez]

Originally posted by jamesf24
I think he meant that Costa Rica beat Paraguay
2-0 yesterday, with their US born coach.

James


It endend 2-1. Paraguay was missing Cardozo, Caniza and Santa Cruz I think. Plus the fat Chilavert started which is a shame that he didn't against Mexico or we would have won that game.

[EL MONO MARIO]

Why people come up w/ these threads is a mystery always to me, it's like asking how DC united would do in the champions league..

The US in comebol would get some positive results, qualify?? Maybe...

Argentina- a power house... They dominated South American qualifying the last two WC.. Now we need to transmit that into WC play.. Don't think the US could beat Argentina at home or in BS AS.

Brazil- Same as Argentina. In a WCQ situation and the press presure the US could not beat brazil both at home or in San Palo.

Uruguay- this program is in shambles... And el centenario dosen't have the presure it once had.. Even stevens here for the US.. US right now is a far better team.

Paraguay- THE TOUGEST TEAM IN WCQ.. In a WCQ situation in Paraguay very difficult.

Ecuador- Don't expect much for 2006.. US a far better team.

Peru- Nothing at this point. US a far better team.

Venezuela- will improve but still US a far better team.

Bolivia- they have LA paz and that's it. Away from home nothing. US a far better team.

Chile- Wait and see. Always depends how they start. at this point Chile and US are at the same level.

Colombia- Maturana part 10! Both teams are at the same level.. But if Angel and some domestic players find the strength on the national game! LOOK OUT SA WCQ!

Today at this point the US could qualify!

[Heist]

Originally posted by Bruce S
we can laugh it up on here, but the reason the USA has risen so fast in the last few years is that no Arena team is cocky.They are ready to play when they walk out there.It is usually our opponents who are surprised, not Arena's team.
Americans are nauseatingly cocky in many ways but not our footballers. We have had to fight for every single ounce of respect, in the USA and the world.

Actually, I think while you are right in general, Arena has taken two cocky teams to the field that I can remember: Poland and Mexico. Once we got creamed and were lucky to lose only 3-1 and against Mexico we won 2-0.
Cockiness can help sometimes. But I've never heard of an Arena team being cocky or anything close to it in an away qualifier. They do know how to get up for those games despite the conditions.
And I have to also agree with the guy who said there is so much talk about how tough the venues are because the teams just arent that great anymore. Besides Brazil and Argentina the rest of the continent is in the top 20-40 teams in the world and then a few are below there. This is one case where FIFA rankings are relatively accurate. At home they are tough, but overall they just aren't what they used to be. Especially a team like Chile. How far they have fallen...

[Heist]

Originally posted by EL MONO MARIO
Why people come up w/ these threads is a mystery always to me, it's like asking how DC united would do in the champions league..

The US in comebol would get some positive results, qualify?? Maybe...

Argentina- a power house... They dominated South American qualifying the last two WC.. Now we need to transmit that into WC play.. Don't think the US could beat Argentina at home or in BS AS.

Brazil- Same as Argentina. In a WCQ situation and the press presure the US could not beat brazil both at home or in San Palo.

Uruguay- this program is in shambles... And el centenario dosen't have the presure it once had.. Even stevens here for the US.. US right now is a far better team.

Paraguay- THE TOUGEST TEAM IN WCQ.. In a WCQ situation in Paraguay very difficult.

Ecuador- Don't expect much for 2006.. US a far better team.

Peru- Nothing at this point. US a far better team.

Venezuela- will improve but still US a far better team.

Bolivia- they have LA paz and that's it. Away from home nothing. US a far better team.

Chile- Wait and see. Always depends how they start. at this point Chile and US are at the same level.

Colombia- Maturana part 10! Both teams are at the same level.. But if Angel and some domestic players find the strength on the national game! LOOK OUT SA WCQ!

Today at this point the US could qualify!

DC would not survive the Champions League. An MLS all-star team would do compete. Club teams in the US are still trying to figure out the international game. Witness the recent losses in central america by MLS teams to other clubs that aren't that great. Only DC United in '98 I believe did anything outside the US, and that was a fluke... a nice fluke, but still a fluke in a competition South America doesn't care about.

Chile? The US is so far ahead of Chile right now! What makes you think Chile is a contender in South America? I'm surprised, because in every other case you gave the benefit of the doubt to the US.

[Rafael Hernandez]

Mexico has gone to the semifinals 4 out of the 5 times they played the Copa America. Still I would not want them to go into CONMEBOL because playing at home is way diferent from neutral stadiums. The US may be as good as the rest of the teams. But playing at home is not the same as in SA.

And everyone talking about Concacaf should realize that in 98 4 of the 5 teams of SA went to the 2nd round. It not ancient history. Especially when you use the same WC as evidence of how good Jamaica is.

[Rafael Hernandez]

Originally posted by Heist

Chile? The US is so far ahead of Chile right now! What makes you think Chile is a contender in South America? I'm surprised, because in every other case you gave the benefit of the doubt to the US.

Chile is better than they were before. Sure, the Chilean league is crap. But if they get a healthy Salas they could be a good team. Players like Pizarro, Acuña, Chamagol, Navia,Tello and Mirosevic are very good players. If they realize their league is crap and start sending players out of Chile and they have good coaching, they can be a great team. Im not saying they are as good as the US but that they should be better than last place and better than Venezuela and Bolivia. I think they are going to be on the up IF they fix the problems I've mentioned.

[Rafael Hernandez]

Originally posted by Heist
Only DC United in '98 I believe did anything outside the US, and that was a fluke... a nice fluke, but still a fluke in a competition South America doesn't care about.


If you are talking about the Copa Interamericana, both legs were played in the US when DC beat Vasco.

[Alex_1]

Originally posted by Rafael Hernandez
Chile is better than they were before. Sure, the Chilean league is crap. But if they get a healthy Salas they could be a good team. Players like Pizarro, Acuña, Chamagol, Navia,Tello and Mirosevic are very good players. If they realize their league is crap and start sending players out of Chile and they have good coaching, they can be a great team. Im not saying they are as good as the US but that they should be better than last place and better than Venezuela and Bolivia. I think they are going to be on the up IF they fix the problems I've mentioned.

I agree with what you stated about WC 98. So many US fans refuse to look at that and insist on looking solely at 2002 for proof. It doesn't work that way.

And I agree with the above comment too. I think many people just don't follow South America like they do Europe or domestic leagues in the US. Hence, there's quite a bit of ignorance when it comes to making a fair assessment of the pros and cons of why a team could or could not qualify from the South American region. I don't think it's far fetched to believe that if the US loses at home to Honduras citing "Many missing players like Reyna and Mathis", and woefully struggle in Central America to Costa Rica and Guatemala (and Barbados until the second half), how will they perform so much more dominantly when they go further away in what could be far more hostile environments? See how easy it is for the foreign based players to snap into gear with the sides after that flight - same with the domestics.

Does this mean that the USA couldn't qualify? No. Things happen in football, and sometimes teams get lucky or teams just come out better. After all, the South American teams would have to come back to the US and Mexico for the home and home. But if I am Brazil, or Paraguay, I would much rather play in Washington DC or even Foxboro... (anywhere in the US really) than in Buenos Aires, Bogota, or La Paz. And friendlies certainly carry a different player focus (and selection for that matter) than a qualifier.

[Bruce S]

Originally posted by Alex_1
I agree with what you stated about WC 98. So many US fans refuse to look at that and insist on looking solely at 2002 for proof. It doesn't work that way.

And I agree with the above comment too. I think many people just don't follow South America like they do Europe or domestic leagues in the US. Hence, there's quite a bit of ignorance when it comes to making a fair assessment of the pros and cons of why a team could or could not qualify from the South American region. I don't think it's far fetched to believe that if the US loses at home to Honduras citing "Many missing players like Reyna and Mathis", and woefully struggle in Central America to Costa Rica and Guatemala (and Barbados until the second half), how will they perform so much more dominantly when they go further away in what could be far more hostile environments? See how easy it is for the foreign based players to snap into gear with the sides after that flight - same with the domestics.

Does this mean that the USA couldn't qualify? No. Things happen in football, and sometimes teams get lucky or teams just come out better. After all, the South American teams would have to come back to the US and Mexico for the home and home. But if I am Brazil, or Paraguay, I would much rather play in Washington DC or even Foxboro... (anywhere in the US really) than in Buenos Aires, Bogota, or La Paz. And friendlies certainly carry a different player focus (and selection for that matter) than a qualifier.
Once again, duh. Do you think the USA qualifies now by playing Costa Rica or Guatamala at a Club Med resort on those countries?I have to laugh at those who think that the USA has no idea about playing in difficult, inhospitable environments. The relative ignorance here about what CONCACAF is like is astounding.

[BelhavenKeeper]

If Ecuador and Uraguay could then Im sure that we could.

[um_chili]

Originally posted by Bruce S
Once again, duh. Do you think the USA qualifies now by playing Costa Rica or Guatamala at a Club Med resort on those countries?I have to laugh at those who think that the USA has no idea about playing in difficult, inhospitable environments. The relative ignorance here about what CONCACAF is like is astounding.

True this--but it's no treat to play away at Honduras or the Office, and I'd say playing at Azteca rivals anything in South America. We're no stranger to crowd adversity (especially since we encounter so much of it at home, sadly enough).